ok i might look into a new PC, but mainly main board, CPU, RAM, hard disk and OS (most probably Windows 7...)

i will probably use my Sonata 2 case along with the Corsair TX650W inside, with the IDE DVD-writer inside (i could switch this one with the SATA dvd-writer i recently bought).

I do have a Scythe Ninja rev. B, but i don't think it'll be compatible with the new Intel socket since i think they didn't made a bracket for it...

So basically:

-i will look for a new main board, CPU, RAM, 640gb hard disk (most probably a WD6400AAKS "blue") CPU heatsink, North Bridge heatsink, MOSFET heatsink, and all this should fit together.
-I will use my Sonata 2 case along with the Corsair TX650W PSU, my eVGA Geforce GTS 250 512mb (PCIe 16x) and my Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer (PCI).
-I will most likely use this 17inch LCD monitor still since it still work fine and using DVI on it.

What i would like:

-Windows 7 OEM, 64bits for 4gb+ capability...
-Having a good Intel quad-core CPU, maybe 2.2gb of RAM slightly faster than today's standard while having a good price for them.
-Using a Scythe Ninja 2 rev.B, and maybe a ThermalRight MOSFET and North Bridge heatsink ONLY if the provided board doesn't have good cooling support for them.
-Using a 120mm fan on the CPU heatsink to choose which fan i want, so i could have a Noctua fan on it.
-an ATX board, not a MicroATX since it would be too cramped inside and loss of space in the case.
-SLi capability is an option...i don't think i would use this, but you never know...
-ENOUGH CLEARANCE for 3rd-party heatsinks and big PCIe video cards (i know some boards have not enough clearance and some capacitors might block the way...)

My budget would be...between 500-700$ i think. I'm not much into overclocking myself since i always fear of blowing something in my computer, so...no specialty RAM, CPU and main board where it gives you overclock feature, since i don't care about that...

I heard the new Core i7 seem to be quite nice and heats less than my actual 90nm Athlon64 3700+, but some of the Core i7 have 2 x 2 cores, not a TRUE quad-cores.

i know stock CPU fans are quite noisy most of the time, that's one of the reasons why i want a to use a 3rd-party CPU heatsink where i would be able to use a 120mmx25mm fan on it.

Tell me if i missed something.

I would most probably buy from NCIX since they also have price-match if there are a better price somewhere else. Newegg.ca sucks with shipping, service and selection, that's why i tend to check NCIX and DirectCanada.

The Mugan 2 is a low cost super cooler that comes with a good Scythe PWM fan. That should keep cost down, and probably permit an overclock to get close to 5Ghz if you want to push it.

5Ghz is probably faster than a 4 core Q9550 running at stock speeds, with that performance all packed into two CPUs. It can handle any desktop use you would reasonably run into. And overclocked to that speed, it probably games as well as any chip out there, provided that other chip is running at stock speed, including the new 6 core Intel.

i know it's a total mess with main boards and CPUs, i can't find the right board with the right CPU and RAM...

What i would like is a good TRUE fast quad-core, with at least 4gb (2 x 2gb) of DDR3 and a good main board with SATA2 or 3, USB 3.0 if possible, enough Chipset and MOSFET cooling

Then you need to pick an AMD Phenom II Black Edition or the Intel i5-750 which according to the CPU chart at Toms hardware is one level higher in performance, or an Intel 9550 which according to that same share is about equivalent.

But all of those options are more expensive and at stock speed, will not game as well. Only the i5-750 will match the overclocked i3-530 gaming performance and then only if the 750 is also overclocked.

Are you sure that you understand that the overclocked i3-530 has approximately as many total clock cycles as the quad Q9550 and each of those clock cycles are slightly faster. I think is becomes equivalent to the stock Q9550 at around 4Ghz.

I can't think of any plausible application in which the stock quad Q9550 will be faster. And if you take the money you save and put it into an SSD boot drive you will do better.

So why exactly do you want 4 slow cores instead of 2 faster ones. It can't be because of speed. If you are talking about the I5-750, it will be faster doing encoding types of things. But that is about the only application even the i5-750 will be faster at.

If you are thinking about multitasking, a clock cycle is a clock cycle. Maybe there is a slight difference between a one core chip and a two core chip. But not between a 2 core and a 4 core - and the i3-530 with multi-threading is more like a 3 core chip.

If the 750 is what you want, that is what you want. But you don't need any of us to make any recommendations. Now maybe there is a more cost effective AMD option to the 750, but the local microcenter sells the 750 for $30 more than the AMD 955 and the intel 930 for $40 more than the AMD 955.

so if i understand, right now quad-cores are more for extreme multi-taskings, and also, they can make dual-cores which could be as good as its quad-core counterpart?

Well..... sort of.

Here is my understanding, anyone is more than welcome to correct any errors.

Software Written to take advantage of concurrent operation on multiple Cores.

With all but a handful of software that no one hardly uses, most software can use only one core at a time. I saw a list of software that makes use of multiple cpus. I didn't recognize most of them, A number of them seemed to be audio visual encoding types of software. So I guess a fair number of people here may use them.

So anything I say doesn't apply to that kind of software. I think the internet browsers are making noises about taking advantage of multi-cpu programming. But it isn't easy to do. And for most sosftware no compelling need to do it. Google's chrome brower does it, sort of. Each instance of it runs as a separate program. So if you have multiple instances of it running, they will be distributed over the cores - but that is sort of a cheat - and most applications can't get away with that.

Gaming CPUs

All things equal, a dual core will run cooler then 4 cores. If you run cooler, you have a better chance to overclock it higher.

Most gamers prefer overclocked dual core chips. The only thing that counst when running a game is to have a fast core. Almost all games run only on one core at a time. If you have two fast cores that is better than a slightly lower clock rate with 4 cores.

The extra core is to run whatever extra software needs to be run while gaming.

Anything more serves no purpose.

Multi-tasking

Multiple cores are good if you have a lot of applications running and you don't want them sucking cpu cycles away from each other.

Some day, maybe in five years, maybe longer, when many applications can distribute their processing over multiple cores, the number of cores you have will = the amount of horsepower you can bring to bear on a particular application. Until then, the gating factor is the speed of your individual cores.

Multi-Threading

The i3 cpus have multi-threading. What this means is that they can take otherwise wasted cpu cycles, at a very granular level, and knit them together to create virtual cores. These aren't as gppd as real cores - but I would submit that two of these virtual cores is equal to a third real core.

The Key Gating Factor

The key gating factor that affects what feels like speed to you, is the speed of the individual cores. As your CPU gets loaded up with multiple tasks, then the number of cores becomes important.

I would submit that in every day use, unless you are running at over 60% CPU utilization, extra cores are not relevant to your computer's performance. And if you have a program hogging a single CPU, the only factor that counts is the speed of that core.

The Clarkdale CPU's overclock at east as fast as the fastest other Intel CPUs. In fact it appears they are the fastest overclockers of all of Intel's CPUs.

Unless you are doing encoding and other multi-core applications, the Clarkdales are likely all that you need, and the extra cores will not give you extra speed, just the ability to haul heavier loads - Loads that it doesn't appear that you are hauling.

And in fact the overclocked clarkdales can haul just as heavy of a load as a stock clocked Q9550 quad core (which by no measure can be considered a slouch).

For How Long

I say it will take at least 5 years before any of the above changes. The above will change as software is developed that takes advantage of multiple cores comes online, I wouldn't hold my breath though. Coding for multiple cores costs time, money and training. For most applications, especially and more and more multi-core horse power becomes available, there is no economic incentive for most software applications to do so.

Even Microsoft Office. The only application in their programmed for multiple cores is Excel, and even there it is the number crunching algorithms, not the whole application.

But what bothers me is the MOSFETS don't have a heatsink on them, and the fact it's a MicroATX board...and maybe this Chipset heatsink might get in conflict with bigger video cards...

any good Main Board/CPU/RAM you can recommend me on NCIX?

in fact, what i'll do is transfer my actual Main Board/CPU/RAM/200gb hard disk in another case, and use this Sonata 2 case, Corsair TX650W, Geforce GTS 250 and Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer PCI, with this new kit.

at the same time, i won't have to reinstall Windows XP on this hard disk since it's going to use the same guts, but in another frame (Antec Three Hundred) with a different, less powerful PSU (Seasonic S12 430W 2nd-gen with sleeved cables and ADDA fan) with a less powerful video card (Geforce 9500GT 512mb DDR3)

where should i cut to lower the price? using a i3 530 instead? the ThermalRight heatsink would be used to have better temps and being able to use the 120mm fan i want for this heatsink...This Asus main board also have a "LE" version which is slightly less expensive but not that much.

i think this WD hard disk is silent enough, without spending too much for a bigger or faster hard disk.

The difference in price for this RAM and with the ValueRam is not that much, so i thought i would pick a faster RAM since it would be good surely while gaming.

I have the same drive. It's the bane of my existence. In comparison to my previous machine, it's dead silent. Now that I have it in a "silent" build it's easily the loudest item and te hardest to keep quiet.

Think about a WD Green series (5400 RPM) drive for storage with a smallish 40 GB SSD to install the OS onto. It'll cost abbout an extra $100 for the SSD. Swap out for the i3-530 to make up some of the difference.

The LE version of that board doesn't have Q-Fan - a really nice BIOS controlled and programmable fan control system. Unless you want to install your own fan controller. I have a Gigabyte board and I wish I would have bought an Asus board with Q-Fan.

The cooler's a good pick, also consider the Scythe Mugen 2 if you can find it. Cools better and costs $10-$20 less in the US.

Studies have shown that RAM speed doesn't really make much of a performance difference. Unless you need the 1600 RAM for meeting some sort of overclock on the processor, think about something more cost effective in the 1066 or 1333 range.

so which WD drive would be a silent one while being fast and enough space? about 500gb would be enough i think, since the 2nd PC is used for downloads and other things.

I like WD drives since the seek noise can be silenced more with AAM.

Actually I agreed with the dual HDD/SDD concept. For the HDD I prefer WD because I imagine them to be more reliable - but not based on any hard facts.

I would choose a 1T or greater WD Black series or RE series. Then make the first partition 50G or 100G or whatever you need for your most active data files. Because of the shallow seeks on that first partition (located at the outer edge of the platters) you will get access times that approach that of a WD Velociraptor.

What good is it if you have a fast loading application waiting around for a slow loading data file? This is my answer to that question.

Get 1T WD Black series and create a small fast access 100G partition, and a larger 900G partition for storage or other uses.

You can use the 100G partition for your frequently accessed data files and also to install applications that are larger and/or less frequently used. This will extend the life of the SSD and speed up those applications that use data files. The 100G partition will approach the access times of a Velociraptor and for overall speed might even beat it.

An extra place to install software is important. A 30G SSD running Windows 7 isn't going to leave a lot of room for applications. You will want to put only your most frequently used applications on it.

The Black is a really fast and loud drive. The point of a hybrid drive system is to keep the performance up where needed (the SSD) and the noise minimal where it's not (The SSD and the slower HDD). The partitioning recommendations above are a good idea though.

The Black is a really fast and loud drive. The point of a hybrid drive system is to keep the performance up where needed (the SSD) and the noise minimal where it's not (The SSD and the slower HDD). The partitioning recommendations above are a good idea though.

I would go for the 500GB AADS if you think it's enough space.

I don't see your motherboard on the list...

1. The motherboard is the top listing.

2. Admittedly there is a tradeoff in using the black series. But I switched from green to black, and I have not found their noise to be a problem. The question if whether a palpable increase in speed is worth it.

30G isn't that large, he is going to have to put some of his application software on the hard drive. And depending on the application the speed of access to the data files may be important to the user experience as well.

yes well, i'm already using, on my 2nd PC, a 80gb IDE (ATA100) drive for Windows, critical apps and patches and softwares such as antivirus, FTP software, etc... and this Windows XP partition is about 13gb only and i still have around 3-4gb free on it.

So i know what you mean by using a partition for Windows, etc...

But yes, what i would like is using a single quiet hard disk that i would create partitions on: 1 for Windows and softwares, 1 for storage, games, movies, etc...

So i would save on having to buy an expensive SSD and standard HDD (i will save 122.62$). I don't mind a 500gb hard disk, as i said, my 2nd PC is doing the downloads and have already a WD6400AAKS, a 50gb storage partition on the IDE drive, and an unused auto-destructing Seagate 500gb HDD (i'm getting more and more reallocated sectors while it's powered on, so it's sitting in my 2nd PC unplugged right now)

and don't forget i have to add both taxes on this amount, so if i keep it like this, it's going to be over 800$! for a quick estimate, do "756.85 x 0.15", it gives 113.53, so the grand total would be around 870.38$!

Yes, i'm living in a country where the government are thieves!

without the SSD, the total would be 634.23$, adding taxes, it will be around 729.36, a lot less than with the SSD! I understand a SSD is totally quiet, but it's still 122$ for a 30gb SSD, it's expensive for me...and doing a big difference on the final price!

But luckily, since NCIX doesn't apply provincial tax since i live outside British Columbia, the grand total would be around 684.43$ with 15$ UPS Ground shipping and free 100$ insurance shipping (adding insurance for shipping is almost always meaningless anyway)

The small portion trick only works if the small partition is small in comparison to the rest of the drive.

If you are doing without the SSD, I think even more that you should get a large non-green drive. Doing 100G out of a 1T drive is good. Doing 50G out of a 1T drive is better. Doing 50 G out of a 2T drive is better still.

and since i'll take parts out of a PC case, which one should i use? my Sonata 2 or my Three Hundred?

Because my worry is still the higher temperatures, a lot of peoples are reporting their i3 530 being around 35 Celcius at idle, i fear mine could be at 45-47 Celcius when idle, like this actual computer i have, on the hotter side, but still in the safe range...

So if i'm going to use the Three Hundred, i would replace the Antec 120mm and 140mm tri-cool fans for Noctua fans instead (NF-S12B FLX and the NF-P14 FLX) and probably a new NF-P12 for the Scythe heatsink...

Or i could still use the Sonata 2, but with a NF-P12 fan on the Scythe heatsink, or will a NF-S12B FLX do the trick? are the fins spaced enough so it doesn't need a lot of static air pressure?

on another note, i'm a bit glad it's a bit more noisy where i moved, i mean...i was at my mother's home before, and in the computer room, it was sooo quiet that the slightest uncommon (but not dangerous) sound from my PC could be heard.

If you're going for one of the faster drives I would suggest thinking about suspending it, or even better, enclosing it in a drive silencer. You say you already have an AAKS - how does it sound to you now?

Because my worry is still the higher temperatures, a lot of peoples are reporting their i3 530 being around 35 Celcius at idle, i fear mine could be at 45-47 Celcius when idle, like this actual computer i have, on the hotter side, but still in the safe range...

The Mugen 2 on a little i3 530 is a mis-match. You will have an excess of cooling capacity. It is cheap and comes with a good fan. The only thing not to like about it is that it's fin array is too big.

Even overclocked the clarkdales automatically downclock and sip electricity on idle. Most people seem to be able to get it up to about 4Ghz without increasing the voltage. At that speed it probably has the multi-tasking capability of a Quad Q9550 but is not going to be generating a lot of heat.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum